My dear Colleague:

I attach a copy of a letter of May 10t from the United Kingdom High Commis­sioner, together with the provisional agenda referred to therein concerning the pro­posed Commonwealth Defence Conference on the Middle East, which it is now suggested should meet in Malta on June 21.

You will recall the discussion in Cabinet Defence Committee on March 20 regarding Canadian representation at the proposed conference on the defence of the Middle East. The Committee agreed that on receipt of an invitation it could be indicated that Canada would be represented by "one or two observers, to consist of a political and/or a military representative from the Canadian mission in London".

It had been assumed when we considered this matter previously that the confer­ence would meet in London. As it is to deal primarily with the Middle East there is, however, some merit in holding it outside London and Malta may well be a suitable place. In any event, a meeting in Malta makes it, I consider, easier for us to be represented only by observers. Although the provisional draft agenda includes sev­eral items, expressed in brief and general terms which may have wider implica­tions, I think it is clear from Clutterbuck's covering letter that the main purpose is to examine the defence problems of the Middle East.

In the circumstances, it seems to me that our representatives might be an exper­ienced senior military officer and an appropriate official of this Department. In view of the likelihood that some NATO questions (e.g., Mediterranean Command, NATO relations with Greece and Turkey and infrastructure) may come up at the Conference, I venture to suggest that it would be a great advantage if General Clark could be made available. As to the political officer we are thinking of Crean, our Charge d'Affaires in Yugoslavia.

It is, I think, important that our representatives should be instructed to confine themselves strictly to the "observer" role. For this reason I do not think it is appro­priate that we should make any suggestions regarding the date, place and agenda of the meeting, unless there is something that we are very anxious to change. The proposed form of liaison with the United States seems to be reasonable.

When replying to Clutterbuck and informing him that Canada will be repre­sented by observers I think it may be sufficient for me to give, as our reason, that Canada's defence contribution is being concentrated elsewhere than in the Middle East. I do not know whether you would like me to add something to the effect that the demands of the Parliamentary Session will prevent you from attending.

May we have your views?

Yours sincerely,
L.B. PEARSON